ve liberation
from the traditional emotional attitude towards these beliefs. In other
words, the development of the emotional and the intellectual sides of
their nature have been unequal, and for these the "Unknowable" has
simply served as a peg on which to hang religious feelings that have
been robbed of all intellectual support. The semi-religious Agnostic
thus represents a transition form, interesting enough to all who observe
how curiously decaying types strive to perpetuate themselves, but which
is bound to disappear in the process of intellectual evolution.

Finally, one would like from the Agnostic some authoritative
announcement as to his position in relation to what is known concerning
the origin of the god-idea. So far as professed theists are concerned
one expects this to be ignored. On the part of non-theists one expects a
more logical attitude. In this case it is common ground with the Atheist
and the Agnostic that the idea of god owes its beginnings to the
ignorance of primitive man. We know the facts on which this idea was
based, and we know that all these are now differently explained. The
belief that there is a god governing nature is just one of those
blunders made by primitive man, and is on all fours with the numerous
other blunders he makes concerning himself and the world around him.
Knowing this, and accepting this, believing that "god" springs from the
same set of conditions that gave rise to fairies and spirits of various
kinds, one would like to know on what ground the Agnostic definitely
rejects the grounds on which the idea of god is based, while professing
a state of suspended judgment about the existence of the object created
by this primitive blunder. It is certainly surprising to find those who
accept the natural origin of the god-idea, when they come to deal with
current religion talk as though it were merely a question of the
inconclusiveness of religious arguments. It is nothing of the kind. The
final reply to the arguments set forth on behalf of Theism is, not that
they are inconclusive, but that they are absolutely irrelevant to the
question at issue. We cannot remain undecided because there is nothing
to remain undecided about. We know that the idea of god is pure myth,
and was never anything but myth. A belief that began in error, and which
has no other basis than error, cannot by any possible argument be
converted into a truth. The old question was, "Can man by searching find
out